Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is so dismissive it's almost condescending.

I know how much food I need to eat in order to survive and maintain a healthy weight. But if I eat that amount of food, I'm still hungry.

Doesn't matter what I eat. I'll eat a diet high in protein and fiber, moderate in fat, and low in sugar and starches, which is supposed to be the recipe to feel full without eating empty calories, but it doesn't work. 16 oz steak paired with an 8 oz portion of green beans or broccoli, and I still get the munchies just 2 hours later.

I should probably go to a doctor and ask about Ozempic or something. I did successfully lose about 50 pounds doing keto and brought my A1C from 6.8 down to 5.4, but I damn near lost my sanity because I was always hungry. I've gained it all back and started to get some of diabetic symptoms again.



How much protein were you getting on the high protein diet? For a long time I heard about "get lots of protein, it helps with satiety" and I thought I had enough protein. When I went to a nutritionist and she made me do a food journal, her first feedback was that I needed to up the proteins even more. And then indeed, I stopped feeling as hungry.


Typically 100-150g per day.


Try 1g/pound of bodyweight (some say ideal bodyweight). For me it's 180-190 g per day. It's hard to eat that much protein. But when I do, the hunger goes away (unusual feeling for me too)


I'm kinda convinced that something has changed (prescription meds ending up in the water supply? micro plastics?) that makes people hungrier than they were in the mid 20th century. the effort required to eat less seems higher than ever, and you can't totally explain the gap and rise in obesity with just lifestyle and food availability.

if some unknown element was making everyone's internal thermostat aim for more food it would explain a lot.


It is sugar (specifically fructose). Sugar reduces satiety and is absolutely everywhere.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42692418


Our genes are heavily evolved to live in calorie scarce environments. In those environments, high calorie foods are amazing. Our biology is built to find them incredibly rewarding.

Science and capitalism have created incredibly delicious foods that are nutritionally lacking, hyper optimized for (against?) our now mis-aligned reward system. In the west, calories are not scarce and the most delcious foods are far from the most nutritious. It will take a long time for our genes to catchup.

Mass producing delicious, cheap, but low nutrition food is profitable. Companies have gotten very good at it. That's the real big change.


that's the macro change, yeah, but the rate of increase in obesity in the us got sharper after the 80s, so it doesn't feel like the complete picture to me.

we got the abundant food and the largely car bound live cycles and it still kept getting worse for decades after that point. I suppose it could be generations growing up only knowing this and so habituated to it more?


The ability to experience endorphins from things unrelated to food has gotten more expensive. Would you rather buy a $13 dollar move ticket and go hungry, or just buy a $13 McDonald's meal and go home to watch a movie? Buy a $75 dollar ticket to a special event? Buy several thousands of dollars in travel? Food is much easier to fill the gaps in feeling good.

The "public presence" of society has diminished due to the internet. You no longer need to put effort into constantly looking your best because social media helps curate your appearance. Going to Walmart is now so relaxed that you can wear pajamas. Putting on your "best appearance" occurs elsewhere in curated ways (i.e. facebook/instagram posts and careful selfies). You can "partition" your social life so that the people shopping at walmart see pajama-you while the Tinder matches see someone totally different.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: